RE: GWART
Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: GWART
Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: GWART
In that case my mind ain't working like it used to... :-) -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 13:03 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm
RE: GWART
Actually, what I meant to say is that, although I'd agree that * is the usual way to go, doesn't the presence of a *@* in the GWART appear as a better route than * ? That being said, I'd just change both to * and raise the cost of the route I didn't want stuff to go down. Neil -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 13:03 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email
RE: GWART
I had tried just raising the cost here and leaving it as is however, mail still flows into one bridgehead and out the other. I would like to do a drawing of our GWART on a diagram to make sure it's optimally configured. I have been having trouble though since it appears the GWART is sectioned and it does not tell where one section starts and one begins. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: GWART Actually, what I meant to say is that, although I'd agree that * is the usual way to go, doesn't the presence of a *@* in the GWART appear as a better route than * ? That being said, I'd just change both to * and raise the cost of the route I didn't want stuff to go down. Neil -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 13:03 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource
RE: GWART
Neil has it right, however - '*@*' more closely matches the target address, so the connector with which that is associated will be chosen every time. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Senior Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA http://www.peregrine.com -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: GWART
So If I change it on both bridgeheads to be *: then traffic for each site should flow through the bridgehead for that site right? Also, I had a question about the administrative management domain name. What is this used for? I read that if you set this up for each site then the traffic will be more controlled. Currently all sites in the entire org are set to the default None. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: GWART Neil has it right, however - '*@*' more closely matches the target address, so the connector with which that is associated will be chosen every time. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Senior Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA http://www.peregrine.com -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any view or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Silversands, or any of its subsidiary companies. If you have received this email in error, please contact our Support Desk immediately by telephone on 01202-36 or via email at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED
RE: GWART
If you set both to * and there's some form of site connector between the two, then yes, all mail will flow through the bridgehead for that site (since the other IMS will have a higher cost via the site connector). But watch out if you implement identical size restrictions on both IMS connectors - you can get a situation where oversize messages bounce between the two IMS connectors 512 times before they finally NDR. The way round this is to restrict the IMS address spaces to the site rather than the organisation. As for the administrative management domain name, I assume you're talking about the admd field. This is usually set to a single space character, and I'd leave this alone in a native Exchange environment. Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 13:55 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART So If I change it on both bridgeheads to be *: then traffic for each site should flow through the bridgehead for that site right? Also, I had a question about the administrative management domain name. What is this used for? I read that if you set this up for each site then the traffic will be more controlled. Currently all sites in the entire org are set to the default None. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: GWART Neil has it right, however - '*@*' more closely matches the target address, so the connector with which that is associated will be chosen every time. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Senior Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA http://www.peregrine.com -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto
RE: GWART
I see. You don't mean the admd field...Q234639 will help you. Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 14 January 2002 14:24 To: Neil Hobson Subject: RE: GWART Thanks for the information, its very helpful. I got confused here though... the admd field for our site is left blank. What I was referring to is the Server Location field on the server properties page. See below: ...OLE_Obj... Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Neil Hobson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: GWART If you set both to * and there's some form of site connector between the two, then yes, all mail will flow through the bridgehead for that site (since the other IMS will have a higher cost via the site connector). But watch out if you implement identical size restrictions on both IMS connectors - you can get a situation where oversize messages bounce between the two IMS connectors 512 times before they finally NDR. The way round this is to restrict the IMS address spaces to the site rather than the organisation. As for the administrative management domain name, I assume you're talking about the admd field. This is usually set to a single space character, and I'd leave this alone in a native Exchange environment. Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 13:55 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART So If I change it on both bridgeheads to be *: then traffic for each site should flow through the bridgehead for that site right? Also, I had a question about the administrative management domain name. What is this used for? I read that if you set this up for each site then the traffic will be more controlled. Currently all sites in the entire org are set to the default None. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Roger Seielstad [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:36 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject:RE: GWART Neil has it right, however - '*@*' more closely matches the target address, so the connector with which that is associated will be chosen every time. -- Roger D. Seielstad - MCSE Senior Systems Administrator Peregrine Systems Atlanta, GA http://www.peregrine.com -Original Message- From: missy koslosky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 8:03 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Re: GWART Nope. LaCretia is correct - * should be the only address space. Missy - Original Message - From: Neil Hobson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 14, 2002 7:49 AM Subject: RE: GWART Something in the back of my mind says that *@* is a better match than just *. But you still haven't stated what your desired flow is Neil -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Posted At: 14 January 2002 12:37 Posted To: Exchange Mailing List Conversation: GWART Subject: RE: GWART One of the address spaces on one bridgehead is listed as *(A)* and the other is listed as *:. One of our admins from our NJ site stated that we need to add the *(A)* to the other bridgehead. I tend to disagree though. I tend to think that the *(A)* needs to be set to match *:. Everything I have researched has stated that it should be *;. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval Dallas LAN Administrator Triaton, NA, Inc. 972-443-4027 ___ -Original Message- From: Chris Scharff [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 3:29 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience
GWART
I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any expierience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GWART
I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
GWART
I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any expierience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: GWART
I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: GWART
Are both your IMC's inbound and outbound or is 1 in and 1 out? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chris Scharff Sent: 11 January 2002 21:29 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: GWART I've read them, but could I explain how to in general. Um, not without a six pack... however, it is Friday afternoon. What is the address space on your IMS boxxen? What is the desired flow for IMS traffic? -Original Message- From: Sandoval, LaCretia, Triaton/US [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 11, 2002 1:50 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: GWART I have two sites with two bridgeheads in place. My problem is, internet traffic is coming in one and going out the other bridgehead. I decided to look into the routing table to see why this is. However, I decided it would be easier to review the table by printing the GWART0.MTA information and read through it. I discovered that there is no entry for the new site that I brought up with the new bridgehead. Does anyone out there have any experience reading the GWART0.MTA file? I am having trouble piecing all of the routes together to draw a picture of how traffic is flowing through our site. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Regards, LaCretia Sandoval _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
